Weekend reads: How to prove (and find) false claims; confessions of a wasteful scientist

booksThis week at Retraction Watch featured what may be a record for plagiarism, a paper retracted because the device researchers claimed to use hadn’t arrive in the institution yet, and a technical glitch, which meant you may have missed some of our posts. Here’s what was happening elsewhere:

Like Retraction Watch? Consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth. You can also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, sign up on our homepage for an email every time there’s a new post, or subscribe to our new daily digest. Click here to review our Comments Policy. For a sneak peek at what we’re working on, click here.

7 thoughts on “Weekend reads: How to prove (and find) false claims; confessions of a wasteful scientist”

  1. Peter Gotzsche and others are not happy

    I see that Tom Jefferson may have found a new hobby to go along with influenza vaccines.

  2. On proving that a therapy is effective they missed an important one. If required to make a comparison between an effective treatment then make sure that subjects have already failed on that treatment. In practice this usually takes no effort, as the subjects will have failed on existing therapies. Why else would they be prepared to be involved in a trial. That is why more first episode trials are needed, if the eventual treatment group is to be patients undergoing initial treatment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.